Dear Asian Youth, If you look at the state of our country right now, you’ll notice that there seems to be an incredible amount of injustice against certain groups of people, most notably, Black people. You’ll see that there have been a lot of reported cases of police brutality against Black people, and news has been surfacing about the mistreatment of Black people in the healthcare system. Both of these are examples of systemic racism, and it’s probably not what you are thinking of when it comes to racism in the US. So what exactly is systemic racism? How does it differ from other types of institutionalized racism? To answer these questions, let’s take a look at systematic racism. Systematic racism is the type of racism where only certain parts of the entire system is affected. For example, if only the police sector and the healthcare system were affected by institutionalized racism, then that would mean that the system is experiencing systematic racism: only certain parts of the system are affected by racism. This is different from systemic racism because this type of institutionalized racism is when the entirety of the system is affected by racism. For example, systemic racism exists when there are biased laws and regulations, as well as unquestioned social and political institutions. Essentially, in the case of systemic racism, it’s a system where racism is a key part of how it operates, whereas systematic racism is a system where there’s a set of practices that discriminate based on race. For the purpose of this article, we will be focusing on systemic racism, because that is the inherent reality of the US’s politico-socio economic systems. While the unjust killings of African Americans like George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmaud Arbery have come as a shock to many, incidents like these aren’t new. Innocent people of colour have been murdered before, and they will continue to be until systems that uphold systemic racism in America are reformed and/or abolished. The push for equality for minority groups, such as women and people of color didn’t truly start until the last century. This is because the systems that were put in place when America was founded only benefitted a very specific group of people: white men who were straight, cisgender, Protestant, able-bodied, and rich. Those that didn’t fit that exact description were at a disadvantage and didn’t have access to the same institutions. When the Europeans immigrated and began to colonize America, they were met with resistance from Native Americans. These natives had less powerful weapons than that of the European colonists, and they lacked the immunity towards European diseases, which allowed the Europeans to take their land. Also, a majority of Native Americas were wiped out because of European diseases they didn’t possess any immunity toward. This established the colonists as the prime leaders and founders of the American territory and resulted in a surge of white pride, which developed into the white supremacy that haunts America today. This supremacy has endangered, tortured, and killed many racial minorities, and continues to do so. Males were seen as the dominant gender, and there was a general belief that nothing good could come from women suffrage. After decades of fighting, women finally got the right to vote- but it was limited to white women. So what about Black women? How does their story tie into the systemic racism in the US? Black women gained the right to vote in 1965 with the passage of the Voting Rights Act. They were one of the last groups to get the right to vote (along with the Native Americans) following white women in 1920, Black men in 1870, and white men, who had it all along. Why did Black women get this essential right so late? The suffrage movement was limited to white women because they were afraid that including Black women would result in a loss of support in the South and possibly other regions. This is a sharp contrast to the suffrage movement’s anti-slavery roots, and shows that racial divides overpowered a movement that could’ve benefitted every women all at once. Additionally, new immigrants were seen to be “stealing” jobs, “lowering” wages, “ruining” American culture, and in general hurting the economy. When Germans and Irish immigrants came to the US from their respective countries, they were immediately disliked because they were Catholic. America was majorly Protestant and believed that the Pope could influence elections by telling the German and Irish Catholics who to vote for. Americans worked against these immigrants in an effort to keep them at the lowest level of society. For example, they did so by holding anti-Catholic riots and forming nativist political parties. This relates to systemic racism because it there was a level of prejudice and discrimination against these groups of people, and because of that, the ideas that immigrants were of a lower status than the Americans and that their cultures were potentially very harmful to America became a prevalent part of American politics and society. However, the assumptions that immigrants would “hurt” the economy or “lower” wages, etc. is incorrect, because it was proven that immigrants in fact helped the economy, didn’t lower wages, and businesses were overall benefitted by immigration because they had a larger work force to draw from. So the next time there’s backlash or complaints about new waves of immigrants, let’s think about how immigrants actually affect the country, not what the perceived effect is. After all, it’s likely that these immigrants are looking for something more. Donald Trump stated, “Why are we having all these people from sh*thole countries come here?” According to President Trump, America should no longer welcome immigrants into the country, while America’s whole purpose was to provide a home for immigrants from all around the world, as stated under the Naturalization Clause in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4 of the American Constitution. There is a great amount of concealed hypocrisy that sheds light on a pattern in the prejudice against minorities today. It is unfair and unjust to close off the U.S. to legal immigrants when most of its citizens have ancestors who were immigrants. It is a burden to carry, knowing that a myriad of lives was lost due to the ancestors of so many citizens. There is nothing that we can do to fix the past; however, there are countless preventative measures that we can take for the future—for we cannot let this hate repeat. I am from Bangladesh. Unspeakable things have been done to my relatives who have fought in the many wars of Bangladesh. Under enemy fire, they have been tortured and killed just because of their nationality. It is harsh to hear and breaks my heart everytime I think about it. How unjust can our world be that we have to resort to violence? Policeman Derek Chauvin was not put in any danger before he decided to brutally suffocate George Floyd and refused to stop, not even when Floyd said, “Please I can’t breathe. My stomach hurts. My neck hurts. Everything hurts. They’re going to kill me.” We all know Martin Luther King Jr. as a man who had a dream. A dream that all people would be treated the same, despite their background . I am sure that MLK had some nightmares as well. And I believe that those nightmares came true. Because, right now, America is not equal. America is at the point where the people are afraid of their government, the government that swore to protect them, the government that is supposed to be a democracy. How can democracy be achieved when racism and sexism run rampant in this country? This is why we protest. This is why we will no longer remain silent. Gross tension has been building up in America even before its birth, and to reduce the tension, we must let it out. America and her citizens have reached their boiling points - and in these complex and historical moments that we live through every day, America’s minorities will not settle for less. We are done being treated unfairly. We are done being treated as inferior because we do not serve another race. We serve ourselves—and we will fight for our natural rights. We will do it in our honor, and not initiate violence until we have run out of peace to give. - Prerna and Ishita

Dear Asian Youth, We sat on the rainbow carpet, and I was cross-legged on top of a red square while next to my three best friends. The entire fifth-grade class was listening to our teacher, Ms. Loderer, about the Civil Rights Movement and Martin Luther King Jr. and segregation and discrimination – all things we thought were in the past when, really, they weren’t. Daniel, my friend’s crush, was too busy giggling with his friends to notice the seriousness of what we were learning, but I didn’t bother to tell him to be quiet. I wasn’t too familiar with the words “race” and “racism” either. Not yet. Then, Ms. Loderer demanded the class to stand up. Gathering into a circle, we watched the screen as she played the “I Have a Dream” speech for us. I was mesmerized by Kind’s low and rumbling voice, hypnotized by his words, words I can’t recall anymore, and inspired by his ability to be brave. He was speaking in front of hundreds and thousands of people, and I couldn’t help thinking that this was like a black and white movie from the past; history was history. Several months later “Do you know why it’s so safe in Hong Kong?” my dad asked. My sister, Erin, and I shook our heads. The Starbucks we were sitting in played a barely noticeable mellow tune – it was jazz, a symphony of beautiful brass instruments singing together, and also my favorite type of music – and I sipped on my iced tea, addicted to the sweet flavor. We sat at a tiny corner by the window as Erin and I admired the world of Hong Kong that we had yet to explore. Right as I was going to begin the sixth grade, my family had flown across the ocean from New York for my dad’s job a couple of days ago. The air was saturated with the scent of coffee grinds, but it was nice. Our dad turned to us after taking a gulp of his Americano. “It’s because there are no 흑인사람 here.” With my eyebrows scrunched, I repeated his last words in my head: 흑인사람 (heug-in salam). I understood what he meant, but I didn’t understand why he had said it. Glancing away from the plastic cup in my hands, I looked up at my dad. Erin glanced at me, confused. Her Korean wasn’t as fluent as mine. “What does that mean?” I sighed. “Black people, Erin.” “Oh.” We didn’t say much after that. Acting like nothing was wrong, my dad smiled at us and turned to read an article on his phone while Erin and I sat in puddles of personal thoughts we didn’t talk through. Why did he say that? we wondered. We unsuccessfully attempted to drown our confusion in the sugary, cold drinks in our hands. Discomfort crept into the back of my throat. Two years later I learned a lot about racism through books and movies. With The Hate U Give grasped within my gripping fingers, I read each page carefully. The entire room was silent, each student reading their own book, and my eighth-grade teacher sat by her desk typing. I knew of police brutality and the continuous racism that occurred against African Americans, but reading about it always made my heart heavy. As much as it was humiliating and embarrassing for me to say, I sometimes forgot about these ongoing issues because of living abroad. Starr was the main character, an African American girl living in a Black neighborhood but attending a white private school because the education there was better. I began to read the part where Starr’s parents had to give her children the “talk” – otherwise known as how to act around police. Always keep your hands where they can see them. Always obey their orders. Never talk back. Be respectful. Comply. For Blacks, calling the police could mean death. The sadness I felt was ineffable. And all the while, I felt helpless. One year later 13th. I stared at the title on my screen; the documentary was given as summer homework for my AP US History class. I was excited to watch it, especially as someone who loves history, but I dreaded the horrifying truth that was going to be revealed. And I didn’t even expect half of what I heard. The one hour and forty minutes flew by too quickly when I was learning something new every second of it. Each story made me fume, each rising number of incarcerated Black men made me furious, each interview made me astounded. The incredulous amount of existing racism wasn’t surprising to me – it was hearing the many more personal stories where injustice occurred in hundreds of harsher ways. We studied history to learn of the past, yet the racism that is intertwined in our lives now, especially for Blacks, didn’t just vanish according to our history textbooks. It has yet to be changed. I remembered my mom recommending the Netflix series about Kalief Browder, one of the boys mentioned by 13th. He was wrongly accused of stealing someone’s backpack, and instead of pleading guilty for a lesser charge, Browder wanted to go to trial. But the trial took three years to occur while his mental health deteriorated in the violent depths of Rikers Island. Violent footage in his jail cells was already enough for me to feel utterly frustrated. I laid in my bed, with my computer on my lap. And I pressed play. By the end of the series, I was in tears. Present Day “Things aren’t always so black and white, Hannah,” my dad told me while we were chewing on our lunch. We were discussing the systemic racism that exists unfairly intertwined around the world. “There may be two equally qualified candidates, one Black, and one white. Many will choose the white person because a white person makes the business look better. Does that necessarily make the person hiring a racist?” I set down my fork. “Well, you’re contributing to that racism.” My dad nodded. “Yes, you are. But that doesn’t mean that you are racist.” I shrugged, understanding his point but not completely agreeing with it. Contributing to racism is also an issue. “I’m just saying that there’s a grey area for a lot of these things. It’s not always that simple.” Yes, of course, issues are more than just a simple coin toss. Not quite sure how to respond, I just got up from the table and put my dishes away. I wished that I could understand more about what he was talking about and refute the statements that sat uncomfortably with me, but I couldn’t. By the time I went back into my room, I was scoffing at my dad’s words. But you can’t always stay in a grey area. Sometimes you have to choose between being the better person. And I think I know which person I want to be. - Hannah C.

Edit: For the argument that ACA-5 is unconstitutional, please refer to the Supreme Court decision Gutter v. Gullinger, which ruled that each admissions decision is based on multiple factors, and that University of Michigan Law School could fairly use race as one of them. The case reaffirmed the court’s position that diversity on campus is a compelling state interest for Michigan. Edit 2: ACA-5 is now a ballot measure, Proposition 16! Remember to register to vote and support Prop 16 this November! Dear Asian Youth, What is ACA-5? ACA-5, or the Assembly Constitutional Amendment 5, is a California constitutional amendment that repeals Proposition 209, which had prohibited the state of California from discriminating against or granting preferential treatment on the basis of race, sex, ethnicity, or nationality specifically in public education and employment. At first sight, Prop 209 seems to make sense - no one should be treated differently based on race, sex, etc. but the situation is complicated on the grounds that prop was specifically introduced to repeal affirmative action in UC schools. After Prop 209 was passed and ‘race-neutral’ admissions began, the likelihood of applicants from underrepresented groups being enrolled into at least once UC campus decreased by 7%. Most dramatically, the enrollment of underrepresented groups fell by more than 60% at Berkeley and UCLA campuses. The end of affirmative action in California led to a 1.4 percentage decline in all underrepresented applicants’ likelihood of earning a Bachelor’s degree. As the University of California President Janet Napolitano put it, "It makes little sense to exclude any consideration of race in admissions when the aim of the University’s holistic process is to fully understand and evaluate each applicant through multiple dimensions. Proposition 209 has forced California public institutions to try to address racial inequality without factoring in race, even where allowed by federal law. The diversity of our university and higher education institutions across California, should — and must — represent the rich diversity of our state." Recently, the University of California Board of Regents unanimously endorsed ACA-5. What is the controversy? There are a lot of myths surrounding ACA-5, so I will attempt to dispel them first before addressing more relevant reasons for opposition. First off, ACA-5 does more than just help minority students, it also has benefits for women and for minorities in businesses and employment. For example, this policy would allow California to have specific initiatives that help out Asian-owned businesses that been effected by COVID19-related racism, which is impossible under Prop 209. I have seen this statistic thrown around in social media: “the number of Asians able to attend UC colleges will be reduced from 42% to 12%” as a result of ACA-5. After thorough research, I cannot find any credible resource on where this ‘12%’ came from. I was able to track it down to an Instagram account called @asianstudentsatrisk (used to be named @asianstudentmatter), whose post stated “The ACA-5 bill will limit the number of Asian students that can get admitted into college. Only 12% of Asians can enroll into UC Universities. This means that less qualified students will take the spots of Asian students! This is racism!” While racism towards Asian-Americans does exist in many aspects of society, I do not think this counts. First off, when Prop 209 was introduced, the rate of admissions for Asian Americans at the University of California system has actually decreased, except for UC Riverside. Therefore, race-blind admissions did not help Asian-Americans as proponents of Prop 209 might believe. I also want to quell any worries by sharing that the Supreme Court has already made it illegal to use racial quotas or caps. ACA-5 will not, in any way, limit the number of Asian students admitted to UC schools. Furthermore, UC campuses take in 14 different factors of an applicant, including but not limited to GPA, socio-economic status, and special talents - race and ethnicity will just be introduced as two of the many dimensions of an applicant’s background. Meaning, you will not be denied admission because of your race. I would even say that ACA-5 will benefit many Asian-Americans as it allows Southeast Asians and Pacific Islanders, statistically more underprivileged than East Asians, to be considered separately from the Asian monolith as race AND ethnicity become important criteria for consideration. The concerns raised by @asianstudentsatrisk are unfounded and frankly, the language used by the account is ignorant at best. It is incredibly insulting to automatically consider students who are non-Asian as “less qualified.” The account @asianstudentsatrisk has also put out another post using Harvard as an example of how affirmative action lowers the acceptance rates for Asian students. I want to point out that the article cited as the source for the information of the post is an opinion article and should not be regarded as journalistic evidence. However, I do think the article is legitimate in its concern at how exactly Harvard considers its minority applicants - just not in the way the writer thinks. I do not consider affirmative action as the actual reason why Asian-Americans are discriminated against in Harvard admissions, especially when there are more convincing alternative arguments. I think the problem with the Harvard admissions process is actually 1. implicit bias and 2. legacy enrollment. According to a 2015 Pew Research report, two Implicit Association Tests studies showed that 50% of white subjects tested held subconscious preferences for other whites over Asian Americans, and 48% of white subjects held subconscious preferences for other whites over African Americans. Therefore, the implicit bias of interviewers, teachers responsible for recommendation letters, etc. could be to blame for low personality ratings. The actual threat to fair admissions at Harvard is the strong preference for legacy applicants, who tend to be white. According to this research article from the Asian American Law Journal, more than 1 out 5 white applicants to Harvard 2010 and 2015 were legacies, and the number of white legacy students admitted to Harvard exceeds the number of African Americans, Hispanic, and Asian-American legacy students combined. Legacy admissions have essentially become “affirmative action for whites” (privileged white students, I might add) especially given that Harvard’s admissions program grants legacy applicants a 40% point boost over the much smaller 9% point boost for low-income students. Given the unlevel playing field, no wonder high-achieving Asian-Americans are not given a fair chance. Therefore, the situation of Harvard and the situation of the University of California are not equitable. Now, finally, we can go over more relevant concerns. Senator Ling Ling Chang, who represents District 29, offered this take: "I have experienced racial discrimination so I know what that’s like. But the answer to racial discrimination is not more discrimination which is what this bill proposes. The answer is to strengthen our institutions by improving our education system so all students have access to a quality education, and give opportunities to those who are economically disadvantaged. ACA 5 legalizes racial discrimination and that’s wrong." Fundamentally, I agree that America’s whole K-12 system needs an overhaul to better support its underprivileged students. Furthermore, I do worry that affirmative action is not enough, especially given that colleges might offer an intellectual rigor that students are not ready for. However, I am a firm believer that affirmative action is at least the right step forward. Underrepresented students should have a chance to improve their own circumstances. As colleges are crucial for students to receive quality training and to be career-ready, it is absolutely imperative that these colleges are open to underrepresented students. I have also heard of the argument that affirmative action should be based on economic status instead of race. For this, I have to say that the UC system already considers a student’s socioeconomic status. Furthermore, one’s race and ethnicity are integral parts of what one’s experience in America will be like: i.e., having to learn a new language, facing discrimination, etc. Racism doesn’t discriminate by class - wealthy and unwealthy minority students still experience racism. In order to have a holistic view of a student, how can you not consider their racial and ethnic background, especially since they are a part of one’s identity? Just as color-blindness is counterproductive as it ignores discrimination, race-neutral admissions do the same. Just as a reminder, under ACA-5, an applicant will not be denied admission just due to their race. Some have also considered policies like affirmative action to be a threat to meritocracy. In ideal circumstances, it is correct to believe that the ‘most ideal’ candidate should be enrolled. However, we do not live in ideal circumstances. America as a whole does not give equal opportunity to its citizens, making it very difficult for underrepresented students to reach the ‘idealness’ of more privileged students. Therefore, to not do anything and to keep Prop 209 perpetuates a cycle of barring opportunities to those that need it the most. Just as bandaging a wound won’t do much until you disinfect the wound first, we need to take active steps to right the wrongs of the past. How can we support ACA-5? I hope that I have at least presented compelling arguments. We can make sure that ACA-5 becomes a reality by signing petitions and contacting our representatives (this link provides a nice template, just change out ‘your organization’ to yourself and change the contact details as needed). You can also join and support organizations such as Chinese for Affirmative Action and Opportunity for All Coalition. The @asianstudentsatrisk account has also endorsed a petition on change.org to block ACA-5. If you have signed it, please consider revoking your signature (here are instructions on how to do so). Moving forward, I think it is important to keep a critical eye on ACA-5 once it is passed and to make sure it is implemented correctly. But above all, we really can’t afford ACA-5 to flop. - Kristina Yin More resources: National Commission on Asian American and Pacific Islander Research in Education, http://care.gseis.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/care-brief-raceblind.pdf California Legislative Information https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200ACA5 The Daily Californian: Berkeley’s News, “CA Should Pass ACA 5, end Prop. 209 https://www.dailycal.org/2020/06/18/ca-should-pass-aca-5-end-prop-209/ BallotPedia, California Repeal Proposition 209 Affirmative Action Amendment (2020) https://ballotpedia.org/California_Repeal_Proposition_209_Affirmative_Action_Amendment_(2020) Edsource, “In historic reversal, University of California regents endorse push to end ban on affirmative action” https://edsource.org/2020/in-historic-reversal-university-of-california-regents-endorse-push-to-end-ban-on-affirmative-action/633751 University of California, “The impact of Proposition 209 on under-represented UC applicants, and the effect of subsequent UC admission policies on URG enrollment” https://www.ucop.edu/institutional-research-academic-planning/_files/uc-affirmative-action.pdf University of California, How applications are reviewed https://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/how-to-apply/applying-as-a-freshman/how-applications-are-reviewed.html The Washington Post, The Forgotten Minorities of Higher Education https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/magazine/wp/2019/03/18/feature/does-affirmative-action-help-or-hurt-asians-who-dont-fit-the-model-minority-stereotype/ Asian American Law Journal, Redux: Arguing About Asian Americans and Affirmative Action at Harvard After Fisher https://lawcat.berkeley.edu/record/1128862/files/fulltext.pdf The Civil Rights Project, Asian Americans and Race-Conscious Admissions: Understanding the Conservative Opposition’s Strategy of Misinformation, Intimidation and Racial Division https://www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/college-access/affirmative-action/asian-americans-and-race-conscious-admissions-understanding-the-conservative-opposition2019s-strategy-of-misinformation-intimidation-racial-division/RaceCon_GarcesPoon_AsianAmericansRaceConsciousAdmi.pdf Pew Research Center, Exploring Racial Bias Among Biracial and Single-Race Adults: The IAT https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/08/19/exploring-racial-bias-among-biracial-and-single-race-adults-the-iat/

Dear Baba and Mama, We’ve had tough conversations in the past few weeks and we’ve butted heads in the midst of this fight for social justice. “You are young and haven’t seen a fraction of the ugly things we have seen.” “We lived through the Cultural Revolution and saw its horrors--there are some things you will never understand.” I want you to know that I do not respect or love you any less for the viewpoints you have because I know that as immigrants, you have faced obstacles I will probably never face in my lifetime. I know you fled from China with hopes of clinging onto your vision of the American Dream: democracy, education, ability to speak up in the face of oppression, and a better future. And I know that the current state of this country must feel so disillusioning, when the faults in our system are exposed and you feel like you have walked from one place of chaos right into another. I wish to educate you more on the history of minorities in this country, and its relationship with the Black Lives Matter movement. I recognize the ingrained opinions you have through no fault of your own, and it is in my hopes to ease some of your worries through this letter. Because the truth is that even as Asians, our history is tangled with Black lives and Black history. You have wondered why Black lives are receiving so much attention now, and why it seems like the attention is only focused on them—because as minorities, we too, have experienced much discrimination throughout American history. The attack on Vincent Chin: a man beaten to death in the 1980’s. We were once banned from immigrating to the United States. And during this COVID-19 pandemic, many of our Asian brothers and sisters lost their businesses to prejudice or were beaten in the streets. I understand any discomfort you feel towards the spotlight on Black Lives Matter, because to be banned from entering the country implies the malice in the ones who orchestrated it. You wonder why we should be supporting Black lives now; because if Asians were able to face our initial hardships and make it to where we are now, why can’t Black people do the same? We’ve worked our way to a “good reputation” (as stated in the “Model Minority Myth”). Why should we support them now? Where was our “special attention”? The fact is that we owe many of our freedoms, and maybe even our reputation today, to Black activists from the Civil Rights Movement in the 60’s. In 1882, the Chinese Exclusion Act banned Chinese laborers from immigration into the U.S. Not even fifty years later, the Immigration Act of 1917 banned all Asian, Mexican, and Mediterranean people, among many other ethnic groups, from entering the U.S. This was shortly followed by the Immigration Act of 1924; it created a quota which prioritized European immigrants and effectively made it impossible for Asians to immigrate, for the sake of “preserving the idea of American homogeneity” and to uphold the image of a “white America.” We were never even given a chance to exist in this country for more than a century. So how did we finally make it in? How did we go from not even being allowed to step foot into America, to becoming the “model minority” group? The answer is the Civil Rights Movement. In popular culture, the movement is often portrayed as more of a “Civil Rights for Black people” movement. But, it actually included much more than just Black people. Even though the people who led this movement were mainly Black activists, it was a fight for rights for all people of color, The grassroots founders of this movement, who inspired the rest of the nation to fight for equality and uplift the voices of minorities—including Black people, Hispanic and Latinx people, Asian people—were Black: Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, and Rosa Parks. The Civil Rights Movement’s incitement was marked when four Black college students sat down in a segregated lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina, and ignored the “whites only” signs as well as the demands to move. This act of defiance towards segregation inspired the other acts that followed that you may have heard of, such as Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat, as well as Martin Luther King’s arrests. History books, news media, and popular culture like to say that it ended there: the Black community defied the Jim Crow discriminatory laws, Martin Luther King, Jr. gave his “I Have a Dream” speech, and then America fixed its mistakes. Towards the end of the movement, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which prohibited racial discrimination in voting. This, in legal terms, and according to the Constitution, means that no one can be denied the right to vote because of their skin color. This means that Asians, Mexicans, Mediterranean’s, Middle Eastern individuals—all people of color could no longer be denied the right to vote. It was just unfortunate that at the time the Voting Rights Act was passed, many other people of color (including Asians) could not immigrate into the U.S. yet. What America didn’t teach everyone is that the Civil Rights Movement did not stop there. In fact, the Civil Rights Movement gained so much momentum in the 60’s that it became much more than a movement for only “Black rights.” These activists wanted to tear down the idea of a “white America,” and fought for human rights in general. Shortly after the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Congress then passed the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which abolished the quota and restrictions on immigrants based on race and country. This is when the second part of the story of Asians in the U.S. begins.This is the act that allowed Asians to immigrate into the country again. This is the act that welcomed Asians, Latinx, Mediterraneans, Jamaicans, Malaysians, Filipinos, etc… into America once again. In 1968, the 14th Amendment of the Constitution was passed. This amendment extended “equal protection of the laws” to all individuals of the United States, effectively stating that people of all colors in the U.S.--including Asians--were to be guaranteed the same types of protections. “You haven’t faced real oppression.” And it’s true; I haven’t faced the same oppression you faced in Asia, because legislations like these prevent us from reliving those shackles you sought to escape. Then in 1969, the 15th Amendment of the Constitution was passed. Many people view this as the Amendment which wrote into the Constitution African Americans’ right to vote.Once again, there is more.. The Amendment states that the right to vote cannot be denied based on race or color. This means that all people of color can now vote—including Asians and Hispanics and any other minorities newly admitted immigration into the U.S. And when you felt like you didn’t have a voice before across the ocean… this amendment gives you the voice in democracy you tried to fight for in China. As you can see in our history, much of the freedoms Asians have today are entangled with the history of Black activists fighting for human rights. I hear you when you say that you have faced racism and discrimination. I hear you when you say you have faced obstacles I can only dream of as you fought for a better life for me. And I cannot thank you enough for uprooting your lives in your home country for the chance of a better life for your children here. But it cannot be denied; we would not be here today if it were not for the battles that the Black community fought sixty years ago. It was the Civil Rights Movement, started and led by Black people, fighting for rights for all people of color, that allowed the Immigration Act to be signed, allowing Asians back into the country. It was the black community that fought for legislation leading to the 14th and 15th Amendment, which now guarantees us and all minorities the same protections the white people of America have had for centuries. Those Black people marched in the streets for the laws that helped us be here today. And then when Vincent Chin, a Chinese man, was murdered years later in 1982, and Asian Americans rallied to fight for justice—just as people are now marching for George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, Elijah McClain, and countless others—Black people joined us in those streets. They marched alongside us and joined the American Citizens for Justice—a civil rights organization for Asians. Then in 1984, the U.S. District Court finally sentenced the man who murdered Vincent Chin, marking the first time Asians had marched for justice for one of our own, and then was protected in court for it. Those marches that Asians organized in 1982 were inspired by the Civil Rights Movement, and sparked an interest in activism among the Asian community for the years to come. We were joined by the Black community, who had marched before in 1965 and knew what it was like, and who inspired a whole new generation of Asian activists to continue the fight for minority rights. Now, Black people need our help. Yes, Asians still face hardships. As do Latinx, Indigenous people, and so many more people of color. The Coronavirus-inspired xenophobia is just one example. But supporting the Black community in their fight doesn’t invalidate our struggles. We see you. We hear you. Other minorities face hardships, but as we fight for Black people now, others will fight for us, too. Racism is still prevalent today, including microaggressions on the basis of race. Even though on paper it says all minorities have the same rights, we still feel like outsiders through the little moments in our daily lives. You know this from the stories I tell of classmates mocking me about eating dog, asking me where I “really” come from. You know this from the times I came home crying in middle school, hating how my eyes looked. You know this from how much more effort you have to give in your workplace to progress as far as the white man in the cubicle next to you. But although the work isn’t finished, the Civil Rights Movement paved the pathway for a future in which everyone has equal lives regardless of their race. Black people were here for us before we were even allowed in this country; and now that they need support, we can only do our best to help them too. Stand with them for George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and Elijah McClain, just as they stood with us for Vincent Chin. Just as they stood sixty years ago for us to be here today. Black lives matter. Because fighting for Black rights and Black justice now—just like in the Civil Rights Movement—is part of a larger movement in America to tear down systemic racism and fight for justice for all people of color, which includes Asians, too. Respectfully and with love, Your daughter.

for most of my life i thought that my body was my own. my body was my flesh and my blood, Persephone’s temptation, a pomegranate path to freedom. it was my skin and my bone, with eyes, ears, and a mouth that took in a million breaths of fresh, sharp, glittering air. i walked the world as if i owned it, in the ecstasy of an endlessly blooming field of honeybees and lavender. i owed the world nothing. so i lived. then you came. taking away my pomegranate seed throne, leaving me in the hidden abyss of night with the toxins in your devastatingly sweet, deceivingly sleepy poppy seed and poison ivy touches. you didn’t know about the nightmares that came afterwards, right? you gave me a lover’s gentle touch, with the bite of a hissing, delusional black-lightning adder. and when you placed your hand on my back and my knee, my body and my entire being, was mummified. my brain hooked out of my nose, liver and lungs removed, with precision. the sacred bubble that had been taught to me since i was a child, created and popped with a single breath. all i did was stand still while you, the adder, nipped at my heels. and the only thing that remained: my tell-tale heart beating in confusion, with a roar of ruby red outrage and indignation. i did not welcome your touches, your unforgiving acts of so-called friendliness. there was no desire for them. and i had only one thought that was worse: could i be overreacting? that’s when i learned that my body was not my own. it belonged to the eyes of adders and men and unknowingly, i had let the river Lethe flow in. what a false path to Elysium i had been traveling. still, poisonings and bites can be healed, with time and love and strength. and the simple, constant remembering that my flesh, my blood, my skin, my bone, my body, could be recovered in all its noble, astrological glory. and my community, which heard me speak my cloud covered truths, and let the sun shine in the gaps. and my conviction, which became a love for myself, as free and destined, as those fated butterfly lovers. i reclaim this body as my own. i am FIGHTING to transcend out of my frightened, paralyzed state of being. and i know this body is my own. your touches have not been forgiven nor forgotten, but i will CONQUER them. - Kaitlyn

Dear Asian Youth, Food is not only a necessity for survival; it also serves a larger purpose in so many facets of our lives. When you want to catch up with a friend, you ask them to grab lunch. Special occasions are celebrated by going out for dinner. When someone loses a loved one, you support them by dropping off baked goods. Many of us can relate to Asian relatives calling to check in only to start the conversation with, “have you eaten yet?” Food not only nourishes our bodies, but it also nourishes our relationships with our families, friends, and cultures. Many of us grew up being teased about the food we brought to school for lunch because it looked different to our non-Asian peers. Some of us grew up being teased by our peers for “eating dogs”, taunted when we pulled out a thermos of fried rice, or mocked for smelling like garlic or curry. This type of food-related racism has only escalated. When the COVID-19 outbreak began, I was scrolling through my for you page on TikTok when I came across racist jokes about “LingLing” eating “bat soup.” I was disheartened to realize that the racism I experienced around food growing up has not gone away. In fact, it is directly a part of the larger anti-Asian sentiment that has unfortunately risen out of the current pandemic. Growing up constantly hearing this racially charged dialogue surrounding the food we eat, it can be hard not to feel a sense of embarrassment. But foods from our cultures do not need to be a source of shame. In fact, the foods our families prepare for us with care should be a source of pride! Through food, we get to know our histories and ourselves. In this column, we will delve into the histories and significance of all the mouth-wateringly delicious Asian American foods that fill our bellies, nurture our souls, and connect us to our heritage starting with the most basic: congee! Congee is prevalent in many Asian cultures and goes by many different names: jook, báizhōu, okayu, arroz caldo. Simply put, it is a rice porridge made by boiling rice in water until it disintegrates into a thick, soup-like texture. Congee has been around for what seems like forever. While some date it back to the Han dynasty, circa 206 B.C. to A.D. 220, others date it back even further to approximately 1,000 B.C., during the Zhou dynasty. Whatever the case may be, congee has stood the test of time and established itself as a staple of Asian diets. The only required ingredients are rice and water, but other ingredients such as poultry meats, beans, peanuts, and green onions can be added to give the dish more flavor and pizzazz. Congee was initially created to stretch a meal when there was not enough food to go around and it serves many purposes. It is often the first food that babies eat before they can chew solid foods. It also serves as a common remedy when you are feeling under the weather as it is warm, comforting, and mild on the stomach. Because of its versatility in the ingredients which may be added, congee can be made at any time with whatever you happen to have leftover in your fridge. My family is Cantonese, so we call congee by its Cantonese name: jook. I first ate jook when I was a baby, and I most recently had jook just last week, after my college graduation. Ever since I can remember, my grandpa has made a large pot of jook every year on the day after Thanksgiving. Why? Because what better way not to waste the giant leftover turkey carcass than to make it into a big delicious pot of comfort? My grandpa spent his early childhood in Guangdong, China before fleeing to the U.S. at the start of World War II when the Japanese military invaded his village. He often cites memories of his childhood in China and recalls never having enough food for the family. Each year for his birthday present, he got a chicken leg all to himself that he would keep under his bed for a week, taking a small bite every night so as not to waste it away too quickly. He used to tell me stories of his village’s “pet” pig, who would go around visiting all the neighbors and getting fattened up just so that the villagers could eventually slaughter him and divide the meat amongst themselves. After moving to the U.S., my grandpa grew up working in his family’s diner so that they could make ends meet. Although his life in the U.S. offered new opportunities, food security for his family was not much better than it had been in China. Making jook was always a sure way to stretch a meal and resourcefully utilize leftover ingredients. To this day, I have never seen my grandpa let a shred of food on his plate go to waste. Leftover rice, beans, and poultry always become jook! Today, I am lucky to say that food insecurity is not an issue for my family. With that, jook has taken on a new meaning for us. What once served as a necessary tool of survival now presents itself as a celebratory dish. When I eat jook, I am reminded of the day after a holiday like Thanksgiving or Christmas, when my aunties and uncles are still in town visiting us. The craziness of the holiday has died down, and we are left to spend quality time together over a fresh, steaming pot of jook. I am fortunate that the recipe for jook has continued to be passed down in my family through generations, as it is not only a delicious treat, but one that tells a story of generations of hard work and sacrifice that all led to the life I lead today as a proud, recent UCLA graduate. The day after my virtual graduation ceremony, I went to my grandparents’ house to return something they had forgotten. When I arrived, my grandpa had a fresh pot of jook made with his leftover chicken bones waiting for me to take back home. It was enough lunch for an entire week! I thought back to my grandpa’s childhood, when he felt so fortunate just to get a measly chicken leg for his birthday. I thought about the fact that my grandpa would save his chicken leg to make it last an entire week and the fact that now he made sure I had enough jook that this would never possibly be a concern for me. At this moment I realized that jook is more than just a Cantonese rice porridge; it is a tool of survival which has been adapted into a love language. It is a love language passed down from generation to generation, each adding new ingredients and bringing more significance. But no matter how many ingredients are added, how many holidays celebrated, how many names it goes by, jook is a dish from simple and humble beginnings with the potential to flourish into something so beautiful that it stands the test of time. What was once a source of embarrassment, I now see as a symbol of love and pride for my roots. So, next time someone tries to make fun of your cultural foods, tell them to STFU because our food is our history and we are proud of who we are. - Olivia

Dear Asian Youth, On Tinder, there is this "big" swipe right feature called the Super Swipe. Regular swiping right secretly matches you with the other person, but when one Super Swipes, it's like enthusiastically matching with them. When the person who you super swiped sees your profile, there is a big blue star that supposedly signals the person that you are interested and triples your chances of being matched with in return. As reality-based as this feature is, who gets these “stars” in real life? Interestingly so, there is an unspoken hierarchy in online dating. According to a study conducted on heterosexual dating markets in multiple online dating services, white men and Asian women are considered the most desirable. This presents many questions, notably: why are Asian women perceived as the most attractive while Asian men sit “at the bottom of the dating totem pole”? To answer such a broad and complicated question, it can be seen that stereotypes have transgressed into the dating world. It was observed that Asian men and women expressed a similar desire to look for potential partners that are both of different or similar races, but, Asian men were twice as likely to remain single than their female counterparts. Oftentimes, Asian women are categorized as exotic, carrying special sexualities; invisible, lacking power or attention; submissive, agreeable and controllable; and delicate. On the other hand, Asian men were likely to be seen as unmasculine; geeky, unsociable, and nerdy; or naive, oblivious of how to act attractively. This notion comes from the idea that Asian men are workaholic and “overly smart”, derived from cultural tradition to be the best academically. In combination, they split Asians at opposite ends- neither for good reasons. For Asian women, racial bias can be coined in a term known as Yellow Fever. Yellow Fever summarizes the idea that women of Asian descent are geisha-like (quiet and sexually silent) or china dolls (dainty and beautiful). The concept objectifies them as docile and rather two-dimensional. Therefore, those with an Asian fetish often want acquiescent females. In all, the dating scape is much more open, because many are more likely to reach out to them, but at the price of racial prejudice and submissive stereotyping. Historically, many speculate the origins of Asian female fetishization occurred during World War II when the United States entered Asia. From there, sex industries boomed with thousands of women across the continent being coerced into prostitution to serve American soldiers. Unsurprisingly, this practice continued throughout the Korean and Vietnamese War, where 85 percent of soldiers sought after a sex worker at one point or another. From there, it can be conclusively drawn that many 20th century Americans’ first encounters with Asians was in a sexual manner, and many roots of this idea still hold today. Moreover, for Asian males, this unique issue means superficial bias before actual consideration of personality traits, or even physical ones. A 54-year-old Filipino-Canadian man, with almost 20 years of online dating experience, explained his observations overall as negative ones. He was primarily interested in Caucasian women, and would more often get no response to his messages. When he asked why it was because they simply weren't attracted to Asian men. Before an evaluation of anything else, his ethnicity was the deciding factor. However, after more time and the realization that he was more “American” than “Asian”, they felt a greater attraction and would reconsider him as a partner. To be even considered, one had to look more- as the hierarchy implies- Caucasian. The notion that "attractive" means "Americanized", like the colonizers that had once assimilated people, has created an immense impact on today's beauty standards. Besides that, though much of our “fair skin equals beautiful” concept comes from a white background, as an Asian community, there is a need for us to learn to be more inclusive of our characteristics. From my personal experience and the countless comments on my tanner skin tone when I visit China to see family, it is evident that there are stigmas that tear our community. Along that line is colorism, prejudice within a race based on skin color. This prejudice plays a huge role and encourages habits of skin bleaching and lightening creams. These products are known to cause dermatitis, mercury poisoning, and other detrimental side effects. Historically, lighter skin was representative of the upper-class of people who did not have to work in the Sun. Contrastingly, those with darker skin meant they worked long hours in the fields. As a society, while roles like this are decreasing, there is a need for progression to learn acceptance, both externally and internally. Despite the polarizing practices many carry, there are improvements underway. More or less, people are generally seeing one another as equals and many are proposing solutions to lessen racial bias in these apps. In an experiment run by OKCupid, it was found that when users were told the people in their algorithms were highly compatible, even when in fact they were not, they were more attracted to those they saw. The power of suggestion plays a big role in who we think we are suitable with. Therefore, by increasing diversity, there is a possibility of breaking down racial biases in a quiet manner. In addition, many have proposed the idea of ridding the option to choose racial preferences as a whole, as dating app Hornet has implemented. Furthermore, Japan-based app, 9Monsters, has its users grouped into nine categories of fictional monsters so that people look past race, ability, and economic status. Others use filters like political bias, education, and relationship history, that encourage users to seek attributes beyond the physical. As anyone can tell, there are many alternatives to choose from- race not needing to be one. It may be awhile before we, as a whole population, look past the superficial- but there is hope. For Asians and those of Asian descent, they can help break down ideas of bigotry and see past prejudice. - Allison

March 13th, 2020. Three police officers quietly line up in front of an apartment in the South End of Louisville, Kentucky. Inside, an African American couple, Breonna Taylor and Kenneth Walker, are asleep in bed, unaware of what is outside their door. Officers Brett Hankinson, Jonathan Mattingly, and Myles Cosgrove were recently handed a no-knock warrant to search the apartment in connection to a narcotics investigation. A judge had signed the warrant, since police believed that the apartment had been used to receive packages containing drugs. A little past midnight, the officers lined up behind the door, allegedly knocking first, and then used a battering ram to break down the front door. They were met with gunfire from Kenneth Walker (a legal gun owner), who fired his gun in self defense, fearing for his and his girlfriend’s life. One of the officers was struck in the leg and the other officers returned fire, discharging almost 20 rounds, hitting Breonna Taylor eight times. She later died at the scene: she was unarmed, posed no threat to the officers, and was asleep in her bed. Police later searched the apartment and found no drugs. A 911 call that was later released reveals Walker’s cries for help while on the phone with dispatchers stating, “I don’t know what happened… someone kicked in the door and shot my girlfriend.” Walker was later arrested and charged with attempted murder of a police officer. Subsequently, these charges were dropped and the officers have been placed on paid administrative leave pending investigation. Breonna was an EMT who worked between two hospitals helping with the coronavirus response in the city. Her mother said she had big dreams for the future. She recalled to The Courier Journal, “She has a whole plan of becoming a nurse and buying a house and then starting a family.” All of which were abruptly cut short that night. Breonna’s story went mostly untold for months. Her boyfriend remained in police custody charged with attempted murder of a police officer. The Taylor family filed a lawsuit against the police department for “wrongful death, excessive force, and gross negligence.” After all, how could three officers serving a no-knock warrant end up shooting a woman who posed no threat and was asleep in her bed eight times? The officers involved in the case claimed that they had announced themselves upon arrival and only broke down the door after there was no response. They also claimed that they only fired after being shot at. However, the lawsuit alleges that police did not identify themselves and that Walker thought someone was breaking in. Neither Taylor nor Walker have a criminal history, nor history of drug use. For months, no action was taken. The police who had shot Breonna were free, Kenneth Walker was still charged for attempted murder, and the Taylor family mourned the death of Breonna, while the nation was struggling with one of the biggest health crises in decades. On May 25th, 2020 the world was shocked and polarized over videos of the killing of George Floyd by the hands of the Minneapolis Police Department. As the video surfaced, many people began to protest against excessive police violence and brutality plaguing the nation. Black Lives Matter, a movement started in 2013 over the murder of Treyvon Martin, recently began to regain momentum over what had happened to Floyd. Angered over centuries of unaddressed oppression, racism, and violence against the Black community, more and more people began to speak out against racism and racial violence in the United States. Breonna’s story began to spread and pressure began to mount in Louisville as activists, attorneys, and civilians began to question how an unarmed black woman who was asleep in her bed ended up dead at the hands of police. Nearly two months later after her death, Breonna’s story started to become a popular reference to the mass injustice against Black people: an African American EMT who was shot in her sleep by police while her boyfriend was arrested and charged with attempted murder of a police officer. People began to organize around Breonna, making calls, and signing petitions. On May 26th 2020, Kenneth Walker had the charges against him dropped. Although he was again free, this only brought little justice to Breonna. While protest and riots consumed Minneapolis, pressure mounted to arrest the officers involved in the killing of George Floyd. On May 29th, ex-officer Derek Chauvin was brought into custody and charged with 3rd degree murder (voluntary manslaughter), which has since been elevated to 2nd degree (Intent to kill, but not a premeditated murder). The arrest of Chauvin and the officers present while Floyd was murdered ignited more and more discussions on why the same hadn’t happened in Louisville. On June 11th, the Louisville City Council unanimously passed “Breonna’s Law,” which bans no-knock warrants like the one that resulted in Breonna’s tragic death. Louisville mayor Greg Fischer voiced his concern about the warrant and “wholeheartedly [agreed] with Council that the risk to residents and officers with this kind of search outweighs any benefit” (New York Times). In addition to banning no-knock warrants, Breonna’s Law requires police to wear body cameras while conducting searches to prevent rash threats or shootings as the actions of officers will be witnessed by other authorities. Amidst the Black Lives Matter Movement and protests for Breonna’s killers to be charged, the government and citizens alike sympathize with the 26 year-old’s family, continue the fight against police brutality, and honor Breonna with this new law. The no-knock warrant, which aims to decrease recreational drug possession and usage, was included as a part of federal enforcement for the 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act. In most cases, police use a “quick-knock approach” upon entering premises for conducting searches; however, the abruptness of a no-knock search is meant to limit the amount of time a person has to hide evidence of drugs or be in a position to physically threaten police officers. In theory, no-knock warrants are to be carried out only in extremely precarious surroundings, yet they have become almost common for raids. 20,000 or more no-knock searches are carried out per year, with 10% of them involving a judge approving a no-knock search when officers only ask for a regular warrant. An arrest warrant gives officers permission to arrest the person/persons named in the warrant. Permission is marked by the signature of a judge. A no-knock warrant, too, must be signed by a judge in order for officers to carry out the surprise raid. 1962 court case Ker v. California referenced the Fourth Amendment’s protection against illegal searches by ruling a no-knock warrant based on assumptions of drug possession as lawful. 30 years later in the case Richards v. Wisconsin, the court determined that officers have “a reasonable suspicion that knocking and announcing their presence, under the particular circumstances, would be dangerous or futile, or that it would inhibit the effective investigation of the crime.” (Justia US Law) The specific circumstance which would involve such an unannounced search is described as “dangerous.” However, numerous no-knock warrants of less dangerous scenarios have also been conducted; some with the intent to prevent destruction of evidence, resulting in deaths of civilians such as Breonna Taylor. Banning the no-knock warrant not only prevents possible miscommunications, but also lives from impulsive violence. Breonna’s story brings up a major division between the justice system and city governments. When Breonna’s law was passed, numerous questions were brought up on how a law could be named after Breonna while the police officers that murdered her still walked free. All three officers, Jon Mattingly, Brett Hankinson, and Myles Cosgrove, were placed on administrative leave, while officer Brett Hankinson was only fired over his use of deadly force. Fired. A big reason why so many officers are able to get away with inhumane and illegal acts of violence is qualified immunity. Qualified immunity is a legal immunity first introduced in 1967 by the U.S. Supreme Court to protect law enforcement officers from liability while on the job (mostly pertaining to just FBI agents). The law prevents a victim from being able to file a lawsuit against law enforcement officials in unclear legal situations where the officers supposedly acted in “Good Faith.” Since 1967, the doctrine has been modified several times, expanding what falls under “qualified immunity.” The 1982 Supreme Court case Harlow v. Fitzgerald ruled that police officers were protected under qualified immunity. It was again expanded in 1987 in the case Anderson v. Creighton, which ruled that law enforcement officers could be protected under qualified immunity when conducting a search in violation of the Fourth Amendment (protection against unreasonable search and seizures). In 2001, the case Saucier v. Katz created a two step test for determining whether an officer was protected by qualified immunity in a lawsuit: 1. First, a court must look at whether the facts indicate that a constitutional right has been violated. 2. If so, a court must then look at whether that right was clearly established at the time of the alleged conduct. This test was later expanded in the 2009 Pearson v. Callahan case to say that the test can be applied, however, it gave courts more discretion on whether to use the test or not. This allowed for qualified immunity to be declared more easily in the justice system. The case also ruled that "[a]n officer conducting a search is entitled to qualified immunity where clearly established law does not show that the search violated the Fourth Amendment." The slow but incredible expansion of qualified immunity over the years has given an unprecedented amount of power to law enforcement agents, including police when on the job. This is a clear example of corruption when law enforcement agents can violate citizens’ constitutional rights while the justice system simply turns a blind eye. How can police officers enforce the law when they in turn aren’t necessarily required to follow it themselves? It is a perplexing moral dilemma that leads to the unjust violence, jailing, and murder of US citizens. This could not be exemplified more by the fact that Kenneth Walker was arrested and charged with attempted murder for shooting an officer in the leg out of self defense. Meanwhile, the three officers who shot Breonna Taylor eight times still walk free today. Sadly, only by witnessing such tragedies have people been filled with outrage and drive for reform. We know that systemic racism exists when we think about racial stereotypes. Why are Black people labeled uneducated and poor? Why is there such a significant welfare gap between Black and White communities? White America was built upon the institution of slavery that ran so deep even after slavery was abolished that Blacks - after centuries of oppression - continue to be marginalized, discriminated against, and judged solely for their skin color. The Black Lives Matter Movement, dedicated to anti-racism advocacy, was created in 2013 following the death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin by a gunshot wound at the hands of a police officer he had a physical altercation with. Since then, Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, Troy Robinson, Breonna Taylor, and countless more have been killed due to racial police brutality. Despite the inception of such a powerful movement 7 years ago, officers in police brutality cases have only recently been called to their long due responsibilities today, starting with Officer Derek Chauvin. Breonna Taylor’s case remained silent for two months following her death. No footage of her death was obtained given the sudden situation and her killers remain unprosecuted today. But we have the power to change that. As rallying cries for Breonna’s killers to be charged ring across the nation, the enactment of Breonna’s law in Louisville, Kentucky marks the start of change amid the 26 year old’s unjust death. Though officers involved in Breonna’s death have yet to be charged and prosecuted, voices of all races and ethnicities have united in demanding justice for Breonna through protests, social media, petitions, conversations with loved ones, letters to the Kentucky Police Department, and more. The passing of Breonna’s Law in Louisville has been met with immense support and calls for other 49 states to follow suit. Even if qualified immunity and claims of self defense prevent officers Jonathan Mattingly, Brett Harrison, and Myles Cosgrove from being prosecuted, we must continue to say her name, share her story with our communities, protest, and demand justice for Breonna Taylor. - Josie and Chris Sources: https://www.nytimes.com/article/breonna-taylor-police.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/11/us/louisville-breonnas-law-no-knock-warrants-ban/index.html https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/qualified_immunity https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/crime/2020/06/10/breonna-taylor-shooting-louisville-police-release-incident-report/5332915002/ https://www.yalelawjournal.org/article/how-qualified-immunity-fails#:~:text=Defendants%20raised%20qualified%20immunity%20in%2037.6%25%20of%20the%20cases%20in,the%20defense%20at%20that%20stage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-knock_warrant "Deadly police raid fuels call to end 'no knock' warrants" https://www.louisville-police.org/35/LMPD-Transparency https://www.louisville-police.org/349/Officer-Involved-Shooting-Investigation- https://www.npr.org/2020/06/15/876853817/supreme-court-will-not-re-examine-doctrine-that-shields-police-in-misconduct-sui https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqQa_0gM6hg

Dear Asian Youth, It’s no secret that the college admissions process is becoming more competitive as the years go by. Higher standardized testing scores, higher GPAs, and more outstanding extracurriculars are just a few requirements that are necessities for today’s youth in the application process. As the race to college gets progressively more intense, it seems like minorities still face specific racial barriers. This fact was highlighted in 2019, when the Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) launched a lawsuit against Harvard University, which centered on Asian-American discrimination. It was found that Asian-American students made up 22.9%, were required to have a higher average SAT score, but had a lower rate of admission than any other racial group. Furthermore, it was discovered Asian-Americans would make up 43% of Harvard’s admitted class if only academics were considered. However, they are not the only minority that faces significant struggles in the admission process. According to the New York times, African-Americans represent only 6% of college freshmen, but make up 15% of college-age Americans. Hispanic populations at colleges are no different. No matter how you look at it, college campuses still are not diverse enough, considering students and staff alike, even with affirmative action. This is a huge issue because, without diversity, students are not exposed to different perspectives and backgrounds that can further educate them. Thus, working in a diverse group of people can make society healthier and stronger. So what exactly does the college application process look like for Black and Hispanic minorities today? There have been some observed trends regarding these students that make college and higher education for Blacks and Hispanics a complex and prejudiced process. Often, gaps can be seen discouraging minority students to pursue degrees and careers such as engineering and education, mathematics and statistics, the physical sciences, and many STEM fields. In addressing the phenomenon, there are three main aspects: if people of color are choosing not to pursue certain majors, or if they are switching out them, if pricing is an encouraging or discouraging factor to different groups to push students into specific majors, whether or not introductory/general ed “weed-out” courses are having a harmful effect on diversity. In addressing the first and second issue, it is important to note that in high paying majors such as engineering, the cost to earn the credential is proportionately just as expensive. Take for example, in Dayton, where minority earnings have lowered 17% in a span of ten years while college prices have skyrocketed. This means a perpetuating cycle of loss in which minorities do not get the same opportunities to even attend institutions with high levels of education is present. In turn, the choice to not pursue high risk majors is a financial issue, where at the same time, encouraging lower feedback careers. More so, many institutions have recognized that students of color receive disproportionately lower primary educations. This means, in taking general courses, those who had better learning opportunities earlier in life are put at an advantage. Therefore, by having certain classes that are advantageous to those who have received a better K-12 education, it disheartens the chances of breaking the cycle. Later in life, this excludes many from professions and makes reform extremely difficult. Recently, ACA-5 has wrongfully come under fire for supposedly setting a “racial proportion system,” or essentially, a “race quota.” ACA-5 bill, as well as the repeal of Prop 209, encourages, supports, and protects ALL BIPOC. What ACA-5 truly stands for is the consideration of race as part of the admissions process, so as to increase diversity in public California universities. This misinformed and groundless outcry against ACA-5 is yet another reminder of the fight we all face in bettering the college admissions process. It is a reminder that we must always stay informed and that we must fight for all BIPOC. To my Asian-American peers, remember that we are not a “tool” to be pitted against other minorities. We must stand in solidarity with other communities, never against them. This leaves us with the question: what can be specifically done to improve the admissions process? One solution has been already put into place: affirmative action. This race-based policy was designed to help minorities by increasing diversity on college campuses (a benefit to all students), creating greater equity in the admissions process, and aiding social mobility. Affirmative action did come under fire for allegedly discriminating against Asian-American applicants, but it remains a crucial policy for increasing diversity, especially for Black and Latinx populations. Asian-Americans are stereotyped, studies have shown that they need 140 points on the SAT for the same consideration as white applicants, but Black and Latinx students also face a racist system that has been working against them, a system that goes way beyond stereotyping during the admissions process. Varying amounts of financial aid, college counseling during high school, and financial support once on campus, all affect the enrollment of Black and Latinx students. Moreover, African American students are more likely to attend for-profit colleges, thus taking more loans, which is yet another barrier in higher education. And so, we must acknowledge that there are severe barriers against all minorities, but we must also rectify the barriers that are deeply rooted in our society. As we’ve seen with the recent call to defund the police and refund communities in the BLM movement, issues that are deeply ingrained into our society need to be fixed by putting more money into the welfare of the people. Improving education using state-level data, looking at schools with greater amounts of diversity and learning from them, creating a “federal student-level data system to track outcomes by race,” using affirmative action to remove the systemic racism in higher education, all of these, and more, are potential solutions we need to implement to remove the racism in our education system. Things like affirmative action are trying to remedy the racism that is rooted in the college admissions process. It was selectively for white people, and that focus was never fully removed in the admissions process. College education remains a prominent tool for social mobility. Trade schools, taking a gap year, entering a profession, all immediately remain viable options besides college, but they aren’t as popular in our culture today. Making sure that all potential college students get a fair admissions process, better access to resources they need before college, and removing the systemic racism that permeates our nation is an absolute priority (this, of course, goes way beyond college). Additionally, college campuses, and towns they take up, are often “liberal hotspots” where changes and different movements express themselves. We need more minority voices in those places to enact nation-wide change. We, as a nation, need to work better on increasing diversity, justice, and accessibility for minorities across America, and college campuses seem like a good place to start. - Allison Li and Kaitlyn Fa

Dear Asian Youth, Activism is not a trend—and it’s terrifying that I have to bring that up. Genuine activism can only come from one’s passion for it. There is no “right” way to be involved; while some people post on social or attend protests to express their support, others may start educating themselves or their families. Regardless, you must always ask yourself: “Do I believe in what I am saying? Or is it to make me look better because everyone else is doing it?” The Black Lives Matter movement has taken hold of the world with millions fighting to bring about change and fix the injustices of America’s corrupted system. Yet, despite the importance of getting justice, many individuals, as well as large corporations, are taking advantage of what has become appealing. Performative activism is quite literally what its name describes it to be. Rather than advocating for what is right because of one’s passion for the topic itself, performative activism refers to utilizing activism as a way to gain recognition or approval from their peers. Participants don a caring facade: performing for their followers to see, acting like thoughtful saints. But, once the cameras are off and the spotlight is no longer on them, they couldn’t give a shit about what this is all about. Performative activism has existed for as long as true activism has; just think about the difference between a vague tweet that basically says “racism is bad,” and doing absolutely nothing else, versus people marching on the streets and waving signs at protests. While the murder of George Floyd has united many with the common purpose of bringing about change, it has brought to light the problematic normalization of this brand of activism. Let’s start off with one of the most prominent examples of this: #blackouttuesday. The hashtag was flooded with countless pictures of black screens, and I admit that I was one of the participants as well. Though the purpose was to demonstrate our unity and to stand in solidarity with the Black community, this movement faced backlash, and for good reason. Performative activism can be compared to color-blindness. It is only the illusion of alliance. It allows white guilt to become suppressed instead of addressed, since people feel as if they have “done their part” when they have done, quite frankly, nothing. Even with racial injustices appearing left and right in this country, white privilege still allows the racial majority to live at peace. #Blackouttuesday only continued to nurture this toxic status quo. Instead of providing ways for non-black to come to terms with their racial advantage and use it to assist in the fight for equality, performative activism allows them to continue to deny reality. Celebrities and popular companies are also partaking in performative activism. Social media paved a path to new ways to warp true activism into performative activism. Remember when people would post the “Black Lives Matter” chain on their Instagram stories to “spread the word” by tagging their friends? Well, celebrities Kendall and Kylie Jenner did just that, tagging their other famous friends with the idea that their stories would make an impact. Additionally, let’s not forget the controversy Madison Beer was caught in when pictures of her posing at a Hollywood protest like a photoshoot were leaked. The pictures show Beer standing on top of a car and posing with her signs, and though she denies the allegations of her doing it for her social media, a lot of people appear to be unphased by it. Along with these public figures, large companies are also at fault regarding performative activism. Amazon, an online shopping powerhouse, is under fire for their ulterior motives concerning bullshit messages about how they support BLM. Although they tweeted a public statement regarding their support for the movement, they were attacked immediately with claims of workers’ abuse and racist products sold. The social aspect of sustainability involves corporations treating workers humanely, so for Amazon to be talking about their support for a social justice movement would be completely hypocritical. As if that wasn’t enough, Spotify, a popular music platform with a history of underpaying artists, merely added 8 minutes and 46 seconds of silence to some playlists during blackout Tuesday. Instead of showcasing Black artists and promoting songs that raise awareness, Spotify has chosen silence. Were these empty acts born from kindness? Or were they just another tactic to get users to believe that celebrities and corporations actually care? They are another example of how bigger organizations manipulate their users’ interests. In the case of these companies, the answer is loud and clear: they keep up their reputation for money, but do not have a care in the world for actually obtaining justice. So, what can you do to help? Trust me, I know how it feels to be powerless when standing up to seemingly stronger figures, whether it’s corporations or even your own parents. But do not let performative activism deceive you or give you an easy way out. Different people support the movement in different ways. Some may find that it comes easy to speak up on their platforms, while others are just beginning to educate themselves. Demonstrating solidarity doesn’t always mean you should feel the need to validate yourself through social media. Continue to sign petitions, donate whatever you can, protest, and speak your mind. Because nothing is more important than participation, especially right now. NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE. -Julianne Tenorio

Dear Asian Youth, When an injustice in our society is pointed out, our first instinct is to tell people to vote. From a young age, we learn about “rule by the people” in which we, as individuals, have the power to speak up and enact change. As a Californian, my history teacher specifically emphasized three processes we have—initiative, referendum, and recall—where voters can vote to change laws or even vote out elected officials. This gives an incredible amount of control to the citizens because we can tackle issues without government consent. We are supposed to take pride in our country’s democratic traits, and America is often compared to other autocratic countries to highlight our democracy as a defining quality. But what is it about the “Land of the Free” that sets it apart from other countries? Certainly, we are not the only country in the world with representative democracy, and a majority of the sovereign countries in the world have “freedom.” To operationally define it, the Human Freedom Index measures human freedom as the absence of coercive constraint, taking into account many factors like legal systems, property rights, the size of government, and security. On a scale from zero to ten, where higher numbers correspond to more freedom, the United States has a ranking of 8.46, putting us in 15th place as of 2019. Furthermore, the Democracy Index quantifies democracy by measuring the electoral process and pluralism, the functioning of government, political participation, democratic political culture, and civil liberties. According to this scale, America is categorized as a “flawed democracy.” Using the same scale from zero to ten, we have a score of 7.96, earning us 25th place. Yikes. So much for the “Land of the Free.” But this is no surprise. Although suffrage is the cornerstone of our democracy, for many people, it is not a right granted to them as a citizen—rather, it is a privilege. In many places, politicians are passing measures that make it harder to vote. This voter suppression compromises democracy and can severely manipulate political outcomes. For example, voter ID laws dictate where voters must present a certain government-issued photo ID in order to vote. This reduces voter turnout by tens of thousands of votes per state because obtaining these IDs can be costly and time-consuming, discriminating against lower-income communities and those with certain disabilities. In addition to ID laws, states often use the process of cleaning up voter rolls—a list of people who are eligible and registered to vote—to prevent eligible voters from voting for illegitimate reasons. A single purge can prevent hundreds of thousands of people from voting by undoing their registration without their knowledge, and these people often do not have adequate notice before Election Day. A voter purge is supposed to update registration lists as voters move, die, or otherwise become ineligible, but this process is often done irresponsibly and this stops many Americans from casting a ballot that counts. Between 2014 and 2018, 33 million Americans were purged. If several more million Americans were eligible to vote in 2016, could that have changed the election outcome? (YES.) Although voter suppression impacts all of us, groups like people of color, younger voters, senior citizens, and those with disabilities are disproportionately affected. Counties with larger BIPOC—Black, Indigenous, and People of Color—populations have fewer polling sites per voter. Polling sites can be frequently changed, making it hard for these voters to find their polling locations. Only 40% of polling places completely accommodate people with disabilities, and 1 in 3 of voters with disabilities report difficulties voting. Additionally, in some states, a felony conviction can lead to disenfranchisement. This rule specifically targets African Americans—across the United States, 1 in 13 African Americans cannot vote due to disenfranchisement. Additionally, states with the most extreme disenfranchising laws have the longest records of suppressing their rights, and voter purge rates can be 40% higher in states with a history of voting discrimination (literacy tests, poll taxes, voter harassment, etc). Furthermore, even when people do vote, gerrymandering schemes in some places manipulate district boundaries to pack BIPOC voters into as few districts as possible, giving whites significantly more power. There is a lot of evidence proving how, in 2016, the aforementioned tactics created Republican advantages and how Trump may have been elected not only by appealing to supporting voters but also by silencing opposing voters. More BIPOC voters miss the registration deadline compared to whites, and this isolates certain groups and silences their voices. In Wisconsin, the biggest decreases in voter turnout were in black neighborhoods, and the number of Democrats who could not vote due to the lack of proper ID exceeded Trump’s margin of victory. Voter suppression has the power to change the course of a national election, so if we want to continue to be known as a country that values the voice of every individual, we need to make sure we are providing equal opportunities for everyone to vote. Attempting to address the racial discrimination in our voting system, the Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965. It prevented districts from changing their election laws and procedures without official authorization and required certain districts to prove there were no attempts to negatively affect minority voters. However, in 2013, the Shelby County v. Holder case challenged the constitutionality of those sections, and the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that the Act was designed to prohibit what no longer exists and was therefore no longer necessary. This ruling removed crucial protections against voter suppression and discrimination. Justice Ginsberg was of the dissenting opinion and pointed out that “throwing out the Voting Rights Act when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.” African Americans are often criticized for not voting but what is not considered are the severe restrictions that hinder their ability to do so. We expect them to fight for rights they have been systematically denied while simultaneously refusing them the right to vote. We need to join this fight not only because it is the right thing to do but also because their fight is our fight—tolerating a country that disregards and silences its vulnerable communities devalues our existence in our nation. We cannot take pride in America’s successes without acknowledging its failures. Voter suppression attacks our civil rights and threatens our democracy. Currently, the Voting Rights Advancement Act is on the Senate floor and would restore voting protections and defend our communities against discrimination. Tell your senators to pass it! In the meantime, the best tool we have to fight voter suppression is—unsurprisingly—to vote. :) - Erika Make sure you know your voting rights! Here is a great resource from the ACLU: https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/voting-rights/#someone-is-interfering-with-my-right-to-vote. Learn about the voter registration requirements for your state here.

Mom says “What a shame.” Says, “People should stop yelling on the streets. The neighbors might be disturbed, how terribly loud it must be.” Dad says, “They’re just kids out for free loot, stealing is second nature. Kids who think cardboard will create change, what do they know?” Mom worries. She is anxious for the cities, for tangibles that will never be replaced. I see the hesitation in her eyes, how she scans the TV and glances down while the gruesome images fill the screen Dad worries, more for the businesses lining the street than the protesters lining up on sidewalks, their cries for justice ringing from building to building, echoing across the nation. But all of a sudden, Dad can’t hear anything but shattered windows and broken bottles or the frantic rhythm of footsteps of feet, dashing from store to store. Mom cries, “Oh my, now they’re burning down shops and stations." Dad tells me, “Do not ever go to a protest.” Mom, Dad, open your eyes. You’re being picky like children, only indulging in the ripe, sweet apples but blind, oblivious to its rotting core. Something needs to change. Before another person dies, before more crowds are teargassed, before our voices get caught in a chokehold. Shoes can be replaced. Cars can be, too. Buildings can be rebuilt, and cities in flames can be extinguished. But what about Martin Gugino? A 75-year-old American who was shoved to the ground by officers, lying on the concrete, blood rushing out of his head. They called it an “accident.” What about Mando Avery’s son? He was seven-years-old when his eyes clamped shut, the burning sting of the pepper spray, cold milk pouring down his tear streaked face, he screamed for someone to make the pain go away. Mom, Dad, you agonize for the wrong things. Why don’t you worry for the brave change makers, kids my age who now stand in bruises and scars, their masks drenched in blood. Sweat and tears falling onto the pavement 400 years of our nation filled to the brim with enslavement, suffering, fear, and overflowing with injustice. Still, you cry. Cry over a revolution, cry over change, cry over common sense. Listen to us. Try to understand. Open your eyes. Please. -Ashley